Is Sugar Toxic?

[Roselle]

Nutrition writer Gary Taubes had an article last week about the possible toxic effects sugar can have on the body. He followed the article up with a blog posting about his cholesterol results from his last test. The numbers look decent. Thought to post.

“Is Sugar Toxic?”

nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html?_r=2&ref=magazine

&

“Before sugar, we were talking about cholesterol”

garytaubes.com/2011/04/before-sugar-were-talking-about-cholesterol/

From his article:

I’ve been tied up the past month, finishing and closing my New York Times Magazine article on sugar and high fructose corn syrup, It came out in the newspaper today. But before the sugar article took over every spare minute of my life, my wife, Sloane, a source of wisdom and humor (and patience) in the family, strongly suggested I get my blood lipids checked and post the results for those who were dismayed or discouraged by my choice not to do so on the Oz show. Sloane wasn’t the only one to suggest this was a good idea. Some of those commenting on my blogs were insistent, to put it mildly.

So it took me awhile to get to a Quest lab with a prescription. Then it took another week for the results to come back. That was three weeks ago. Now I finally have the time to post them. Keep in mind as you go through these that I do indeed eat three eggs with cheese, bacon and sausage for breakfast every morning, typically a couple of cheeseburgers (no bun) or a roast chicken for lunch, and more often than not, a ribeye or New York steak (grass fed for dinner), usually in the neighborhood of a pound of meat. I cook with butter and, occasionally, olive oil (the sausages). My snacks run to cheese and almonds. So lots of fat and saturated fat and very little carbohydrates. A deadly diet, according to Dr. Oz. Without further adieu, here are my numbers,

 

[puzzleannie]

it is for me, if you not diabetic, I can’t say
his 2 books together Good Fat Bad Fat and Why are We Fat and What to do About marshall the science on the topic (and btw what science has failed to demonstrate, namely that lowering either caloric or fat intake does not result in long term weight loss). There are some holes in his argument, but so are their in the opposition. I take Dr. Richard Bernstein’s advice and ignore the scale, and rely on blood sugar testing, lipid testing every 3 months, and my skinny jeans. the only way I can maintain my health on all levels is with a low carb diet and reasonable amounts of good quality protein by which I mean organic and grass fed vegetable and animal proteins with minimal processing and carbs in the form of organic veggies and berries. This is not medical advice it is simply reporting. I can move and function on this diet and my numbers are drastically lower, including and especially chol. and sugar. works for me. I would only advise read any nutrition book that claims to report the science with a hyper-critical eye and judge by your own results as measured quantitatively, not as subjective feelings.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

What we really need is a balanced diet.

If sugar was toxic, we would all be dead already … generations ago.

You can get a sugar high and you can get a caffein high and you can probably get hyper from overeating almost any one thing.

I read an article once that if you drink too much water, you can flush out the electrolytes from your system … and die.

The business about dietary cholesterol being deadly came out of a study of autopsies on soldiers killed in battle during the Korean War … 1950 - 1953.

Doctors concerned about battlefield injuries were shocked to find that 19-year-old deceased soldiers had their arteries clogged with cholesterol. The doctors were shocked. Must be lack of exercise and poor diet. And that started the war on cholesterol.

But if you examine the whole “system” of soldiers in battle, something else … another factor … emerges: STRESS!

When a person is under stress, the body (and mind) respond by increasing blood circulation to the brain and the major organs to provide the strength needed to cope with the outside stressor. Blood pressure increases. As the blood pressure increases, the arteries begin to suffer minor tears and the body’s natural repair mechanism is to plaster over the tears with naturally-generated cholesterol, which after the stress goes away, will dissolve and be absorbed when the tears are naturally repaired with new tissue.

The amount of cholesterol that is deposited on the artery wall surfaces depends on how much stress the mind-body is under and for how long.

And, in a battle, who is most likely to experience the maximum amount of stress? A soldier experiencing the violence of combat with the noise and the shock and the concussion … and who sees his cohorts be violently killed right in front of him. He knows he is next.

His body goes into fight or flight mode; but he cannot flee.

And so he is killed. And the doctors are shocked to see the physical manifestations of battlefield stress.

So, take a look at the stress of the work environment … the stress may be severe … AND it may last for decades … not just for a few hours or a few days or a few weeks.

Blood pressure goes up. People compensate by overeating and adding weight [not something a soldier in battle can do, by the way; the food just isn’t there] … and the added weight places more stress on the body. Puts strain on the heart. Increases blood pressure. Tiny tears in the arterial walls. Body responds by plating the damaged areas with cholesterol … but it’s not a temporary condition because the stress doesn’t go away.

The body doesn’t get a chance to self-repair the damage and reabsorb the cholesterol.

At some point the mind-body combination is just overwhelmed and the person dies.

Something to think about.

 

[centurionguard]

The World Health Organization puts present global statistics of registered Diabetics at over half a billion.

While most associate Diabetes with obese people this is not always true. Millions of diabetics are normal and even below their (medical) mass body weight.

I’m one of them.

 

[puzzleannie]

The
While most associate Diabetes with obese people this is not always true. Millions of diabetics are normal and even below their (medical) mass body weight.

I’m one of them.

true the only reliable diagnostic on diabetes is serum glucose, serum insulin and onset of complications of diabetes. the only diet that seems to provide intervention that lowers all of these is a low glycemic diet (not the GI diet, truly limiting intake of sugars and foods that break down to sugars). Again, every book seems to pick and choose research studies but the most complete biblio seems to be in /dr Richard Bernstein’s books Diabetes, and the Diabetic Diet (not to be confused with two other Bernsteins out there, one of which advocates vegetarian, the other standard low fat).

anyhow, Taub’s books are a good read, but if you want more of the science–and he is not a scientist or doctor, but a science journalist–read Good Fat Bad Fat. If you have only been waiting to be convinced to adopt a low carb diet, read the more recent book, Why we are fat. He is very light however, because it is not his purpose, in the nuts and bolts–for that someone with long term experience in the nuances of hi-pro low-carb like the Eades (Protein Power) gives more help in how and what to do, eat and avoid. For instance the Eades go into how to choose protein and why some things (supermarket beef and eggs for instance) cause problems for some people.

again, not recommending a diet, rather recommending you do the research and not rely on popular journalism and mass media for medical advice. The tests your own doctor does don’t lie.

Monte makes an excellent point that scientific studies are good only in so far as what they actually study, measure, quantify and report. A study comparing weight loss diets which only looks at food ingested and does not factor in genetics, stress, exercise, mortality and other factors does not give the whole story. Look for research and reporting that compare all the studies done over time on those factors. For instance, compare all the studies on cholesterol–what do they actually measure? Be especially critical of population studies and make sure that the research shows the individuals studied actually imbibed the diet, and lived the lifestyle upon which the assumptions underlying the research are based.

Back when the Korean war research was done doctors did not know the mechanism by which cholesterol and its resultant plaque morphed in to actual heart attacks and strokes, nor the intra-cellular chemistry. The best quick pop explanation of that for newbies is in Arthur Agatson’s Heart health revolution (pushing of course the South Beach diet) but he explains current state of knowledge on those factors well for the average patient.

also true linked to centurion’s observation, at least half of people with first heart attacks have “normal” cholesterol levels, nor does cholesterol number correlate especially well with weight. That number alone does not tell the whole story of what is going on in their arteries, liver, heart, and the cellular level.

 

[DawnInTexas]

No. Artificial Sweeteners are the poison.

Sugar could just aid in killing you. Not by being toxic, but by feeding cancer, packing on the weight by the calories, etc.

All things in moderation.

Except for those artificial sweeteners! Ever notice that chewing gum doesn’t say “Sugar Free” anymore? That’s because all of them-have artificial sweeteners in them. Doublemint! Juicy Fruit! Wrigley’s Spearmint!

*For those who have children, and don’t want to feed artificial sweeteners: I have only found ~some~ gumballs to have sugar, and not artificial sweeteners. On the bottom shelf at Wal-Mart, in a clear tub, and at Sam’s Club (read the box).

Sucralose was suggested to me-when pregnant with our second daughter-by my Physician. He said it was “safe.” I said: No thanks. I’ll just cut out sugar. So, I did.

Come to find out, it causes brain cancer in unborn children.

The Federal Government does not state that (brain cancer in children) on their Website:

cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/artificial-sweeteners

I’ll stick with sugar. Like God made it.

God Bless you.
+Jesus, I Trust In You!
Love, Dawn

 

[puzzleannie]

No.

I’ll stick with sugar. Like God made it.

God Bless you.
+Jesus, I Trust In You!
Love, Dawn

he made a lot of good healthy foods, that have been turned into toxins after the food industry got done with them, but he also made a lot of foods that are good and healthy for most people, but are toxic to some people, like me, with damaged metabolism.

 

[DawnInTexas]

he made a lot of good healthy foods, that have been turned into toxins after the food industry got done with them, but he also made a lot of foods that are good and healthy for most people, but are toxic to some people, like me, with damaged metabolism.

The protein you eat-was fed on sugar, not artificial sweeteners.

God Bless you.
+Jesus, I Trust In You!
Love, Dawn

 

[centurionguard]

true the only reliable diagnostic on diabetes is serum glucose, serum insulin and onset of complications of diabetes. the only diet that seems to provide intervention that lowers all of these is a low glycemic diet (not the GI diet, truly limiting intake of sugars and foods that break down to sugars). Again, every book seems to pick and choose research studies but the most complete biblio seems to be in /dr Richard Bernstein’s books Diabetes, and the Diabetic Diet (not to be confused with two other Bernstein’s out there, one of which advocates vegetarian, the other standard low fat).

anyhow, Taub’s books are a good read, but if you want more of the science–and he is not a scientist or doctor, but a science journalist–read Good Fat Bad Fat. If you have only been waiting to be convinced to adopt a low carb diet, read the more recent book, Why we are fat. He is very light however, because it is not his purpose, in the nuts and bolts–for that someone with long term experience in the nuances of hi-pro low-carb like the Eades (Protein Power) gives more help in how and what to do, eat and avoid. For instance the Eades go into how to choose protein and why some things (supermarket beef and eggs for instance) cause problems for some people.

again, not recommending a diet, rather recommending you do the research and not rely on popular journalism and mass media for medical advice. The tests your own doctor does don’t lie.

Monte makes an excellent point that scientific studies are good only in so far as what they actually study, measure, quantify and report. A study comparing weight loss diets which only looks at food ingested and does not factor in genetics, stress, exercise, mortality and other factors does not give the whole story. Look for research and reporting that compare all the studies done over time on those factors. For instance, compare all the studies on cholesterol–what do they actually measure? Be especially critical of population studies and make sure that the research shows the individuals studied actually imbibed the diet, and lived the lifestyle upon which the assumptions underlying the research are based.

Back when the Korean war research was done doctors did not know the mechanism by which cholesterol and its resultant plaque morphed in to actual heart attacks and strokes, nor the intracellular chemistry. The best quick pop explanation of that for newbies is in Arthur Agatston Heart health revolution (pushing of course the South Beach diet) but he explains current state of knowledge on those factors well for the average patient.

also true linked to centurion’s observation, at least half of people with first heart attacks have “normal” cholesterol levels, nor does cholesterol number correlate especially well with weight. That number alone does not tell the whole story of what is going on in their arteries, liver, heart, and the cellular level.

For instance the Eades go into how to choose protein and why some things (supermarket beef and eggs for instance) cause problems for some people. again, not recommending a diet, rather recommending you do the research and not rely on popular journalism and mass media for medical advice. The tests your own doctor does don’t lie.

Yes; your right medical tests from doctors don’t lie. I have terminal pancreatic cancer.
even though my weight is normal.

Interesting observation in everything you stated. Diabetes can most often be based on hereditary factors and not always health difficulties in maintaining proper weight which can sometimes also be resultant of mental psychological factors in reference to depression etc.

In relation to various forms of cancers not necessarily diabetic related, I’ve always wondered if humans were meant to consume eggs and particularly (red meats) despite given the fact what our ancestors consumed.

Much study has been researched attributing “red meats” as being high risk cancer contribution to offspring. Makes me thinks if we humans should have been vegetarians.
So much for hypothesis.

Peace
Chris

 

[GEddie]

Our Natural Body is a delicately tuned heat engine.
Anything it uses, in imbalance, can cause damage.
Folks have died drinking too much water.
Even oxygen (the breath of life itself) has toxic effects at high pressure.

The problem with sugar (a very high density fuel, which can be used in a solid rocket, BTW, and which our head NEEDS to function) is that our bodies are not adapted for the large amounts of it on a modern menu.

ICXC NIKA

 

[puzzleannie]

The protein you eat-was fed on sugar, not artificial sweeteners.

God Bless you.
+Jesus, I Trust In You!
Love, Dawn

yes quite right, a lot of it was raised on high-sugar content grains, and sugar laced processed feeds, that is why the source of our protein is also an issue and why I resist Taube’s contention that all meat is good protein by definition.

 

[manualman]

Obesity is a common feature of industrialized countries. It’s practically getting to be universal in America. I think it is no coincidence that this has happened simultaneous with people transitioning to high sugar, and highly refined starch based diets. (Starch turns VERY quickly into sugar upon digestion).

Very few commonly available foods in nature are high sugar or high starch. God knew what he was doing. The sugary things that DO exist are generally fruits available for very short periods of time throughout the year. The rest of the year you had to eat more complex grains and meats. Not coincidentally, these kept you healthy.

The even better things about whole foods is that they don’t make you crave MORE snacks shortly after the way sugary/starchy snacks do. No sugar burst and subsequent crash. Just slow, steady energy release.

My question: If whole grains require less processing, how come good whole grain bread costs TWICE as much and refined/bleached and “enhanced” white bread???

 

[wabrams]

While most associate Diabetes with obese people this is not always true. Millions of diabetics are normal and even below their (medical) mass body weight.

I’m one of them.

Agreed. What most people have in their minds are the obese type 2 diabetics with problems like extremity swelling, diabetic ulcers, and amputated toes and feet.

 

[wabrams]

In relation to various forms of cancers not necessarily diabetic related, I’ve always wondered if humans were meant to consume eggs and particularly (red meats) despite given the fact what our ancestors consumed.

Much study has been researched attributing “red meats” as being high risk cancer contribution to offspring. Makes me thinks if we humans should have been vegetarians.
So much for hypothesis.

Peace
Chris

Our ancestors ate plenty of red meat: cattle, deer, antelope, bear, buffalo, etc. There is a region in France where they consume far more red meat than here in the states and their incidents of cancer per capita is far lower.

 

[jilly4ski]

also true linked to centurion’s observation, at least half of people with first heart attacks have “normal” cholesterol levels, nor does cholesterol number correlate especially well with weight. That number alone does not tell the whole story of what is going on in their arteries, liver, heart, and the cellular level.

Indeed, our family doctor use my family (mom, dad, siblings) in a case study for cholesterol. Because us kids at 16 and 18 (and older) had outrageous cholesterol levels. I at 16 had C level of 224. But we were all eating homemade food and 3 sport athletes. (My mom even grinds her own hamburger with leaner meat).

 

[puzzleannie]

Our ancestors ate plenty of red meat: cattle, deer, antelope, bear, buffalo, etc. There is a region in France where they consume far more red meat than here in the states and their incidents of cancer per capita is far lower.

the unanswered question in all studies based on “who at what meat and how much” is “what did the meat eat” (while it was still on the hoof).

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

the unanswered question in all studies based on “who at what meat and how much” is “what did the meat eat” (while it was still on the hoof).

That is an excellent point. Our ancestors weren’t injecting chemicals and hormones or creating genetically modified meats. They weren’t forcing animals to eat things their bodies aren’t built to digest. The sad thing is that few seem to care about the potential consequences, on human health, of eating processed and modified meats.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Our ancestors ate plenty of red meat: cattle, deer, antelope, bear, buffalo, etc. There is a region in France where they consume far more red meat than here in the states and their incidents of cancer per capita is far lower.

Eskimos and Native Americans originally ate basically an all-meat diet, as did inhabitants of some cultures along the Arctic Circle in Europe and Asia.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

No. Artificial Sweeteners are the poison.

Sugar could just aid in killing you. Not by being toxic, but by feeding cancer, packing on the weight by the calories, etc.

All things in moderation.

Except for those artificial sweeteners! Ever notice that chewing gum doesn’t say “Sugar Free” anymore? That’s because all of them-have artificial sweeteners in them. Doublemint! Juicy Fruit! Wrigley’s Spearmint!

*For those who have children, and don’t want to feed artificial sweeteners: I have only found ~some~ gumballs to have sugar, and not artificial sweeteners. On the bottom shelf at Wal-Mart, in a clear tub, and at Sam’s Club (read the box).

Sucralose was suggested to me-when pregnant with our second daughter-by my Physician. He said it was “safe.” I said: No thanks. I’ll just cut out sugar. So, I did.

Come to find out, it causes brain cancer in unborn children.

The Federal Government does not state that (brain cancer in children) on their Website:

cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/artificial-sweeteners

I’ll stick with sugar. Like God made it.

God Bless you.
+Jesus, I Trust In You!
Love, Dawn

God did not make those little white crystals we call sugar (sucrose) and He most certainly did NOT make High Fructose Corn Syrup (which is a poison).

He did make honey and fruit juices that seem to be meant to be eaten sparingly.

As for me, I’ll stick to my basic low-carb/moderate protein/high natural fat diet (when I can get myself free of the sweets) which gives me weight loss, blood sugar control and lower cholesterol0